Do you want to promote Honey Bear Bourbon to Tried and True

[cuginosgrizzo]

Hi guys, recently I have been testing ShineonCrazyDiamond recipe for Honey Bear Bourbon and I can rely that this recipe has a good tasting grain bill, it is based on an easy process and has repeatable results over the different batches. So for me this is a go, i cast my vote to move HBB to the Tried and True.

Please express your vote, and give your motivations in this thread.

[DBCFlash]

I have all the ingredients on the way right now so I will let everyone know how this recipe works for a novice to all grains. I anticipate good results, and if I get a good product HBB will get my vote. I'm really excited to see this happen!

[Still Life]

It's my first all grain. The procedure is clear and it works.
6 batches so far.
Putting it up in small casks this weekend, but I gotta say it's pretty good right from the pipe.

[acfixer69]

Hi hope this is not the shape of things to come for the Tried and True. Anyone that's thinking learning and never tasted it boinks a plot. Takes the hard trials of the earned and craps on them IMO. If you didn't make it and didn't drink it Who the hell are you to make it a tried and true. This is sad.
I havent made it so I don't vote.

AC
said it cuz TnT is supose to be

[cuginosgrizzo]

Takes the hard trials of the earned and craps on them IMO. If you didn't make it and didn't drink it Who the hell are you to make it a tried and true. This is sad.

Hi AC, I don't think this is sad. You could and should have expressed your vote as "NO, it's too early". The poll is out for this: it is not meant to be a plebiscite, just to gather opinions. And your opinion, like other's, counts!

[DBCFlash]

Just in case you didn't realize, I didn't cast a vote as I haven't tried it yet. I will after I've run a batch or two.

[Tater]

Takes the hard trials of the earned and craps on them IMO. If you didn't make it and didn't drink it Who the hell are you to make it a tried and true. This is sad.

Hi AC, I don't think this is sad. You could and should have expressed your vote as "NO, it's too early". The poll is out for this: it is not meant to be a plebiscite, just to gather opinions. And your opinion, like other's, counts!

No you should run this by a mod before posting .tried and true stands for just that. You like it and tried it . Others who have done same and feel same way will post it. Then it will make it there. Poll deleted. So got 1 who is sold on this recipe any others with experience with it ?

[Still Life]

I was afraid of that, cuginosgrizzo...
Ran the HBB nomination by a mod myself already, and it was denied.
Good shot, though. We can still enjoy it regardless.

[MichiganCornhusker]

Just my 2 cents:

My impression has always been that the T&T recipes are more of an organic process. Lots of folks attracted to and working with a recipe with good results, and the recipe thread offering continued encouragement and support for the brewers.
Once many many people have had good consistent success with the product, over time, the idea to include it in the T&T section will just become self evident, there will me no need to nominate. I would suggest that this recipe could be headed in that direction, but time will tell.

As far as I'm concerned you could just truncate the thread title to "Do You Want to Promote Honey Bear Bourbon". I cast a yes vote for that! I do think the enthusiasm for this recipe is inspiring and justified.
I've tasted it, brewed it, and filled a BadMo barrel with it. And SCD is doing a great job of supporting people who are making it for the first time, several who are making AG for the first time.
And I like the idea of promoting the use of specialty grains in whiskey, like Special B, Crystal Malt, Roasted, Toasted, and the Honey Malt used in this recipe.

[dieselduo]

+1 MCH It makes a nice drop and very easy to make

[thecroweater]

I was afraid of that, cuginosgrizzo...
Ran the HBB nomination by a mod myself already, and it was denied.
Good shot, though. We can still enjoy it regardless.

Err well actually he did me and my suggestion was to make a post to determine the peer review . Obviously each good recipe can't be in T &T short list there are just to many and many that are similar. That said I see no harm in discovering how many use a given recipe and what their opinions are I guess if it turned out to be tried and true popular recipe then its likely to be acknowledged as such. I don't see this thread as trying to force anyone's hand and that for sure wouldn't work in any case:thumbup:
I should add that I have not used this recipe and so have no opinion to offer one way or the other

[aircarbonarc]

I actually added it to my recipe book, never made it but it looks like a well balanced good recipe. I'll be trying it one day down the road.

[Shine0n]

I could hug SCD for this recipe (I wont)

This was my first attempt of AG and I'll say after 3 proper mashes following this recipe and protocol I'll say it's a tried and true for me whether or not it's posted there.

[bitter]

It looks like a pretty nice recipe. Not tried it yet but its on my todo.

B

[panikry83]

While I haven't made this myself, I've drank it enough that I can say it's a solid bourbon. Great flavor, subtle sweetness, honey and caramel flavors. I've also seen SCD make his mashes - the process is easy, consistent, and reliable. I'd recommend anyone to give it a go. Maybe it doesn't reinvent the wheel but, special malts are where the innovation is when speaking of grain bills and this one certainly is special.

[Shine0n]

Nominated

[Anode Effect]

I vote yes.

[cuginosgrizzo]

Hi guys, the purpose of this thread is not just to cast a blind vote, but to tell us your proven experiences with this recipe, so that it may become a T&T. Please if you like HBB share with us how you it was to follow the recipe, if all was smooth or you had any problem, and tell us about the end results.

Yesterday I stripped my fourth batch, after the usual seven days fermentation, getting a constant yield. I couldn't help but taste the middle jar. I find that it has a really deep taste, very grainy and full and round, with hints of sweetness.

[Still Life]

Nine runs under my belt now.
#'s 10, 11, 12 are in the fermenters.
3 liters in a small cask 'til I can free up more space, and the rest is in jars with tiny amounts of oak chips for immediate sampling.

Hard to believe an all grain is so easy. Just follow the instructions.
The rich grain flavor carries over well (I run it in pot still mode).
The nose as you raise the glass also has that wonderful grain smell and clues you in to what's to come.
If a drink can somehow make you feel you've matured your palate, this is it.

I recently posted on how smooth the last batch was. There was no sting and at first thought the alcohol content was low.
Turns out it was 70%!

Haven't shared a drink with anyone, and not sure I want to. They'll want more & more.
Suffice to say I want to tell the world about it, but let's keep it between ourselves m'kay?

[Shine0n]

I'm on my 5th ferment now, as 1-4 was 1.065 like clock work!

Easy to follow, repeated results, and smooth as silk

I keep some white to sip immediately and age some on med toasted American white oak cubes for the long awaited year... for the oaked, I can not comment as of yet but for the white I can, and will!

Smooth, nice mellow grainy nose with a hint of sweetness. It has no burn, but will warm you from the inside. Very nice on the rocks or in a coke.

I'll report back in a year with the results of the aged.

I'll refer anyone wanting to try AG for the first time to this recipe for its ease and simplicity and repetitive results.

Shine0n

[der wo]

Perhaps this thread needs a few arguments against:

Comparision Honey Bear vs Jimbo's Bourbon:
The differences are:
- Adding boiling water to corn vs adding corn to boiling water.
- Adding the malt at 153F vs 146F.
- Honey Bear has a little amount of speciality malt in the grain bill, which is added at the beginning to loosen the corn up.

Comparision Honey Bear vs NCHooch's Bourbon:
- Adding boiling water to corn vs cooking the corn.
- Adding the malt at 153F vs 150F.
- Honey Bear has a little amount speciality malt. Both recipes spent a small amount malt at the beginning.

So Honey Bear is a mix from those two recipes + adds a small amount honey malt. That's all.
Of course SCD knows this and he never claimed the opposite. SCD to Jimbo:

It of course has alot of your recipes and processes in it. And some NCHoochs. And some other legends. It's hard to really come up with explosive new protocols, without reinventing the wheel.

No argument against the quality of the recipe, but perhaps an argument against a t&t?

NCHoochs and Jimbos recipes look more complicated, because all the little details are already discussed there. This process is still running with SCD's recipe. We have here currently a few threads where members start their first AGs with Honey Bear and run into problems, just like they would with other recipes too probably. Finally they get it to a success and now they think, this is the one and only way it works and all other members have to go this way too, although HB is the only AG recipe they ever tried and other recipes offer just exactly the same.

Why starting with Honey Bear? Less to read than with the two t&t recipes. Is this good or bad? Your choice.

Why not starting with it? Because the addition of honey malt influences the taste away from a normal Bourbon. IMO it is informative to compare the own stuff with store bought stuff. With wich store bought spirit you want to compare Honey Bear? I don't know. IMO the learning speed would be higher with a normal Bourbon grain bill.
So if starting with Honey Bear, I would recommend to replace the honey malt with a base malt.

But if there will be never a better process than those two t&t -recipes perhaps, shall there never again a new Bourbon recipe become a t&t?
Perhaps if it is tried from enough also experienced members and perhaps all the little details (which every recipe has) are discussed to the end? Are we already there?
But why shall experienced distillers move from Jimbos, NCHoochs or a similar own recipe to HB? At least with the same grain bill, in general they all have almost the same taste and the same conversion. If one is easier or the other depends on the equipment. They do it only because of the idea with the honey malt. But will they use the process SCD describes or will they use their own like always, but add a small amount honey malt? I think, they would use their own process.


It's no post against SCD or the recipe.

[japsinok]

I continue to enjoy this thread. Der wo raises some interesting and thought-provoking points. I am winding down my first AG project, getting close to 5 gals of spirit that is a close variation of NChooch's bourbon. Along the way, I am learning a lot about mashing and now get a consistent OG above 1.070. I continue to tinker with times and temps (sometimes by accident) but can always get an SG of 1.070, and all of my mashes have finished either near or below 1.000. I don't have a mill so just use cracked corn out of the bag and have found a cooking process that works for me (detailed in another thread). I use alpha- and gluco-amylase, and mash in the 6-row and rye at ~145 (before adding the glucoamylase at 140F).

Once this is in the barrel, the plan is to try SCD's Honey Bear Bourbon grain bill, but I will certainly mash in the grains using the protocols that are working for me now in a 20# grain bill. This will include hydrating and premashing the corn, cooking it for a full hour, and adding malt grain and enzymes at the appropriate temps.

As der wo alludes, I will be basically substituting 6-row with red/white wheat, and rye with honey malt. If I get good conversion, is there any reason to think that what I have made is not a wheated honey bourbon, even though I might not have followed the steps outlined originally by SCD? I'm certainly not going to develop an entirely new mashing procedure unless what I am doing now does not convert this recipe.

In other words, if I follow my own mashing protocol, using SCD's grain bill, is it not still Honey Bear Bourbon?

This gets back to der wo's point. Are there details to the HBB recipe that make it fundamentally different? If so, these should be discussed. I could see arguments for testing mashing the way I have been doing, then following SCD's process to the letter, then comparing the results. But if not, then most likely I will stick with what has been working for me (until it doesn't!).

[der wo]

Are there details to the HBB recipe that make it fundamentally different?

Yes. The HB procedure works easier for a large batch than the other recipes:
http://homedistiller.org/forum/viewtopi ... =3&t=65703
IMO this thread earns a sticky more than HB a t&t (But I never do such large batches and don't know if it is really a new idea). So when someone wants to ferment something like 50gal, use the HB procedure (with any grain bill), or at least copy this detail into your own procedure:
- Cook water in steps and pour it over the corn in steps. In a cheap plastic drum.
- Jimbos recipe would mean, buy a really large ss pot and burner and cook 40gal water in it and then add the corn.
- NCHoochs recipe would mean, after you have buyed the expensive pot and burner and managed to cook the 40gal water, throw the corn in and cook and stir it for one hour without scorching and dying. Edit: And then you may glue the rolled down wallpapers again to the walls of your kitchen.

[japsinok]

Are there details to the HBB recipe that make it fundamentally different?

Yes. The HB procedure works easier for a large batch than the other recipes:

Ah, yes, I see!

In my hands, I have a feeling that one reason for the good conversion I get using Tractor Supply cracked corn right out of the bag, when others advocate milling it finer or using corn meal, is the hour cook (low constant boil) step to fully gelatinize the corn, ala NChooch. I would be afraid of losing some conversion if I just dumped hot water over cracked corn in steps. Though perhaps it's worth the side by side experiment to compare. There is nothing that says one must set up a 50 gallon mash.

I am doing only 10 gals per mash. I do have a large 50 gallon fermenter (old food grade olive barrel) that I have used for a peach brandy, but for now I will stay with what are smaller and more manageable volumes. I do, however, understand the rationale of mashing enough for several stripping runs at once so can understand going with SCD's way for large mashes where the NChooch way would not be practical.

It's good that you have pointed out the key difference in these three recipes related to corn processing. I'll definitely keep that in mind for when (if) I go big.

For now, as you said in a previous post, I'll go with the mashing protocol that works for me (as will most, I think).

[der wo]

7lbs cracked corn ( or 5 lbs corn meal!)

He is aware, that pouring boiling water onto cracked corn yields less than onto corn meal or perhaps cooking cracked corn for an hour. But he doesn't care. You can simply add a bit more corn. It's cheap. And it's not proven, that less conversion tastes worse than a full conversion in the end. But if you think, full conversion tastes better, stay with your protocol. Edit: I also aim always for a full conversion. I think it tastes better. But I am not very sure about it.

[ShineonCrazyDiamond]

Such a controversial little bear, aint it?

Can I just say something here? I don't recall asking anyone one their opinion, good or bad.

Seriously though, I have sat here for the last month, listening. I will have my say now, and you will not here from me again on the subject. I have seen my creation - that I put together by reading, learning, trying, adjusting and then finally sharing - get tossed around and dissected. I kept my mouth shut. I had opinions and views, sure, but obviously everyone does. Even those who have nothing to gain or experience to offer. One thing I haven't heard is a discrediting word from someone who has tried it. Surely there will be someone, and I will respect their difference of taste when they do.

Let me start off by saying I don't care. A year and a half ago I set out on a personal quest. I wanted to fuck with bourbon. I wanted to know what specialty malts do to whiskey. I read a lot, went through a lot of recipes taking notes and dissecting. I took what I saw as the best aspects of them, and left the rest. I stole shamelessly. I then studied different malt characteristics, and tried things. I looked around and found very little about specialty malts in whiskey. I asked. There was no recipe that anyone could really point me to and say "Here, this is a great recipe that shows you how to use specialty malts". Some had theories and offered a little advice, but that was it.

So, almost a year and a half ago I quietly posted my favorite one. I wasn't looking for an entry into the T&T. I humbly offered up my work - a recipe with a specialty malt that worked with and enhanced the grain bill (instead of some of the overpowering attempts I originally had - careful with that Simpson Double roasted- whew!).

Somewhere along the way MCH casually grabbed the bottle at Truckin, and reported back how much he liked it. Then some new members read it, and figured it made all grain seem achievable, and it just so happens that as a white dog, it is quite impressive and it comes ready to drink from day one.

The actual corn cooking method was not something that I was trying to promote with the recipe. Who the hell cares how I cook the corn? There's only a few ways to do the same thing. That was just how I settled on as my method. If others read that and liked the simplicity, then great. Take it, use it to create your own grain bill, and use it to give back to the community. It won't take anything away from mine. I only aimed for 1 thing. To bring awareness to specialty malts. The rest was simply the path I took while describing my recipe.

Forget HBB for a second. Perhaps all this is because people didn't really know the process of how something gets into T&T. I mean, after all, is it called a T&T procedure, or a Tried and True recipe? Do people really have to create a whole new way to cook corn in order for it to be considered revolutionary enough to get moved to the recommended list? That's all T&T is right? Some of the best recipes tried by numerous members and deemed true to it's claims? Ever read the subtitle under the T&T folder? It simply says, "Refined and tested recipes for all manner of distilled spirits".

Has anyone ever read Bentstick's Oat, Wheat, Rye recipe? He simply posted up a recipe he liked, and I think it was different because he worked out a well balanced malt to unmalted characteristic. It didn't provide an earth shattering protocol. Just a good grain bill. And 3 posts in, BOOM- T&T recommendation. Oh the outrage! lol . (It probably helps to put a glass in 'ol Tater's hand, haha ). I love both Tater and Bent, this is not about them or Bent's great recipe (the next on my list when I get into malting). This is about not forgetting where we all came from. And that ain't gonna happen cause some other people create popular recipes to add to the beautiful T&T collection.

As I said though, I really don't care. I didn't ask for any of the praises, or the nay sayers. What means the world to me is that I have helped take several members from sugar to all grain - (and on top of it all, it has a specialty malt in it. How wonderful!) That is all I care about. I am truly honored that my Honey Bear left a good impression and didn't scare them off AG. You can judge my HBB from Recipe Development or T&T and (in my worst Clark Gable impression) - "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn". I will continue to help whoever comes across my recipe, be it their first AG or their 100th. It would be an honor to have my contribution among the legends that paved the road for me, but I'm perfectly fine having it be the rebel trouble maker of the HD underground. I (quoting MCH), have stood on the shoulders of giants, and will still help the next one stand on mine.

Thanks for letting me give back a little piece that was given to me

[RedwoodHillBilly]

Good on you. Having been brewing ag beer for 30 yrs, I've done experimenting with specialty malts. You've opened my eyes to specialty malts in whiskeys. I guess that I'm going to have to go through my beer notes and see what I found. Damn you, another rabbit hole

[thecroweater]

Not sure what you are getting at, are you thinking every recipe should completely dissimilar to another? Good luck with that, the oldest surviving detailed mash recipe dates from 3900 BC and the process was some 3000 years old then. Since that time there have been recorded many tens of thousands of variations with maybe 4 or 5 that a vastly dissimilar. The purpose for any reviewed and excepted recipe collection is to provide a range of recipes and methods that result in a consistent and desirable end product. Its not an exercise in discovering the most varied and outlandish recipes. Original is an interesting term when dealing with something as ancient as mashing.
Edit written before the above two posts

[der wo]

SCD,
I fear you took me wrong. I didn't "tossed around and dissected" your recipe. I discussed a few details.

"Who the hell cares how I cook the corn"? At least me, I found it very interesting, that skipping the exhausting cooking part doesn't make a big damage to the yield.

Yes. The recipe from bentstick. Also only a special grain bill. That's true.

[der wo]

Not sure what you are getting at, are you thinking every recipe should completely dissimilar to another?

Also you took me wrong. As you can read, I have asked the same question like you. And I let the answer open:

But if there will be never a better process than those two t&t -recipes perhaps, shall there never again a new Bourbon recipe become a t&t?
Perhaps if it is tried from enough also experienced members and perhaps all the little details (which every recipe has) are discussed to the end? Are we already there?